I'd be a lot more optimistic about this if the changes being proposed were "at the edges" of the CBA. If this involves a redefinition of core issues (like reducing the player's percent of total revenue, more team revenue sharing), I think we're in for a long siege.
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=399319
Fehr and the NHLPA will be a much tougher opponent this time around. I'm not hopeful this gets worked out for the season to start on time.
While I'm sure that's true, ultimately regardless of how tough they are, they're going to run out of money before the owners do. If it goes to the mattresses, the players are going to lose...again.
it's just stupid for everyone involved. If the owners are making a profit, then lets play hockey. If they're not, then the players need to be shown that and swallow their pride. Anything more than that is noise.
I'd be a lot more optimistic about this if the changes being proposed were "at the edges" of the CBA. If this involves a redefinition of core issues (like reducing the player's percent of total revenue, more team revenue sharing), I think we're in for a long siege.
Every CBA negotiation in the salary capped leagues starts with a discussion of the % that each side gets.
Usually there is a smaller negotiating group and a larger group that gets to vote on the deal that the negotiating group hammers out.
Usually, the more people in the room for a negotiation like this, the longer it takes to get a deal done.
Sure, every member of the PA will get an up or down vote on the tentative agreement but I don't think the size of the committee will affect much at all assuming the players are well organized. I've been on a committee of about 15 and we functioned fairly well with elected co-chairs who did 90 percent of the talking. Dissent was hashed out and responses to management proposals were voted on in caucus.
wasn't sure where to put this....so mods can move it to appropriate place if need be ..or create a new thread....
Renaud P Lavoie @RenLavoieRDS
NHL proposal to players: 1-reduce players hockey related revenues to 46% from 57 %. 2-10 seasons in NHL before being UFA.
Renaud P Lavoie @RenLavoieRDS
3-contracts limites to 5 years 4-no more salary arbitration. 5- entry-level contract 5 years instead of 3.
Well, I smell a nice fight brewing. That's not so great for players. I realize it's a starting point, but there's a lot of negotiating to go to make that pliable.
wasn't sure where to put this....so mods can move it to appropriate place if need be ..or create a new thread....
Renaud P Lavoie @RenLavoieRDS
NHL proposal to players: 1-reduce players hockey related revenues to 46% from 57 %. 2-10 seasons in NHL before being UFA.
Renaud P Lavoie @RenLavoieRDS
3-contracts limites to 5 years 4-no more salary arbitration. 5- entry-level contract 5 years instead of 3.
1 - this would cause a reduction in the cap by ~7.7M. There will be teams who will not like this unless there's an amnesty buyout/salary rollback.
2 - no problem although July 1 gets even less important
3 - 5 seems to low...I'd go with 7
4 - don't care
5 - unless the ELC max increases, this won't happen at all
Ten years in the NHL to be eligible for UFA doesn't seem fair to players. For the average guy they're like what, 30 years old before they have any say where they play?
wasn't sure where to put this....so mods can move it to appropriate place if need be ..or create a new thread....
Renaud P Lavoie @RenLavoieRDS
NHL proposal to players: 1-reduce players hockey related revenues to 46% from 57 %. 2-10 seasons in NHL before being UFA.
Renaud P Lavoie @
3-contracts limites to 5 years 4-no more salary arbitration. 5- entry-level contract 5 years instead of 3.
In other words, the players' cut probably drops to 50-53%; 7-8 seasons before UFA; I don't think there will be a term limit, but if there is it won't be fewer than 8-10 years; could see ELCs going to 4 years; and I think arbitration stays, but maybe eligibility moves to the 6th season--though I'd love it if they went to interest arbitration and forced the parties to actually make good-faith offers.
Well, I smell a nice fight brewing. That's not so great for players. I realize it's a starting point, but there's a lot of negotiating to go to make that pliable.
Its a really unreasonable list of demands, I'm actually quite astonished and worried for next season if that isn't just posturing. League revenue has gone up vastly more than salary expenses, so a reduction in player share of any kind was going to be unpalatable, let alone something that large. All the extra contract rules don't seem like they will go over well, either.
In other words, the players' cut probably drops to 50-53%; 7-8 seasons before UFA; I don't think there will be a term limit, but if there is it won't be fewer than 8-10 years; could see ELCs going to 4 years; and I think arbitration stays, but maybe eligibility moves to the 6th season--though I'd love it if they went to interest arbitration and forced the parties to actually make good-faith offers.
You make too much sense. It can never be that easy.
Its a really unreasonable list of demands, I'm actually quite astonished and worried for next season if that isn't just posturing. League revenue has gone up vastly more than salary expenses, so a reduction in player share of any kind was going to be unpalatable, let alone something that large. All the extra contract rules don't seem like they will go over well, either.
Welcome to initial offers in collective bargaining.
wasn't sure where to put this....so mods can move it to appropriate place if need be ..or create a new thread....
Renaud P Lavoie @RenLavoieRDS
NHL proposal to players: 1-reduce players hockey related revenues to 46% from 57 %. 2-10 seasons in NHL before being UFA.
Renaud P Lavoie @RenLavoieRDS
3-contracts limites to 5 years 4-no more salary arbitration. 5- entry-level contract 5 years instead of 3.
Good luck with that, NHL. "Remember all those things you accepted as compensation for the salary cap? Well, forget them. In fact, we'll take even more back than we gave."
1 - this would cause a reduction in the cap by ~7.7M. There will be teams who will not like this unless there's an amnesty buyout/salary rollback.
2 - no problem although July 1 gets even less important
3 - 5 seems to low...I'd go with 7
4 - don't care
5 - unless the ELC max increases, this won't happen at all
Are the Owners ****Ing insane with those demands...46%?? We are not goIng to be playing until 2013 I know it's posturing but that is an insulting list of demands for the players.
Are the Owners ****Ing insane with those demands...46%?? We are not goIng to be playing until 2013 I know it's posturing but that is an insulting list of demands for the players.
They are starting with as much as they could possibly hope for and working from there.
It's a classic negotiation tactic.
And I really doubt there will be any lockout or strike.
Are the Owners ****Ing insane with those demands...46%?? We are not goIng to be playing until 2013 I know it's posturing but that is an insulting list of demands for the players.
It's definitely insulting because they beat up the players last time around and the things the players actually gained are what the NHL are proposing to remove. It's absurd. If the owners actually stick to these things I will have no patience for anyone who takes the owners' side.
This looks like the right thread to bump for CBA talks...and with that said, details of the initial proposals from the owners are leaking out in the press tonight:
Quote:
Renaud P Lavoie @RenLavoieRDS
NHL proposal to players: 1-reduce players hockey related revenues to 46% from 57 %. 2-10 seasons in NHL before being UFA.
Larry Brooks @NYP_Brooksie
Post has learned proposal not only would reduce share to 46% of HRR as per @RenLavoieRDS but would redfine HRR to dramatically reduce gross
What a slap in the face to players. I hope a negotiation helps their situation... not in the mood for a lockout or strike.
As for the cap, contract parts...they seem similar to the NBA and we all know how that went. Is it me or the owners are trying to royally screw the players :|
Good luck with that, NHL. "Remember all those things you accepted as compensation for the salary cap? Well, forget them. In fact, we'll take even more back than we gave."
